By Charlton Allen
Chief Justice John Roberts’ 2024 Year-End Report offers a sobering analysis of the judiciary’s role in an increasingly polarized Republic. At its core, Roberts warns of a growing threat: the erosion of judicial authority by political actors, lower courts, and state governments. While many media outlets, such as ABC News, gloss over the deeper implications, Roberts’ message is unmistakably a rebuke of efforts to delegitimize the judiciary, particularly by the Biden administration, key Senate Democrats, and a judiciary increasingly comfortable ignoring Supreme Court precedent.
Drawing from my experience as Chief Judicial Officer and CEO of the North Carolina Industrial Commission, I have seen firsthand how fidelity to judicial authority is essential for maintaining the rule of law. The judiciary is not a system of mere suggestions; it is the backbone of constitutional governance. Roberts’ report is a clarion call against those who would jeopardize this foundation for short-term political gain or ideological expediency.
Hawaii and the Culture of Judicial Defiance
The Hawaii Supreme Court’s actions in State v. Wilson epitomize the defiance Roberts warns against. In this case, the court reinstated charges against a citizen exercising his Second Amendment rights – despite the US Supreme Court’s clear ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen. That landmark decision affirmed the right to carry a firearm in public for self-defense, a fundamental liberty deeply rooted in the Constitution’s original meaning. Yet Hawaii’s highest court dismissed this precedent, effectively declaring that the Second Amendment does not apply within its borders.
Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Justice Samuel Alito, sharply criticized this judicial insubordination in a statement accompanying the Supreme Court’s denial of certiorari. Thomas warned that Hawaii’s failure to give the Second Amendment its proper weight risks reducing constitutional rights to second-class status. Such defiance is not merely a local anomaly – it is a symptom of a broader trend.
Efforts to undermine the judiciary are not new. Calls to pack the Supreme Court, for example, have a long and ignoble history. In 1937, Franklin D. Roosevelt, frustrated by a conservative Supreme Court striking down key New Deal legislation, attempted to expand the Court by adding six justices sympathetic to his agenda. This proposal met with fierce bipartisan resistance, not just because it threatened judicial independence but because it would have irreparably damaged the Court’s legitimacy.
Today’s progressive calls to pack the Court echo Roosevelt’s ambitions. The goal remains the same: to bend the judiciary to the will of those dissatisfied with its decisions. As history shows, such efforts weaken the judiciary’s authority and fracture public trust in its role as an impartial arbiter of the Constitution.
The defiance Roberts highlights also recalls the discredited doctrines of nullification and interposition. Nullification – the idea that states could invalidate federal laws they deemed unconstitutional – was championed by figures like John C. Calhoun to resist federal tariffs and later to defend slavery. Interposition, a related concept, was invoked during the Civil Rights Movement to justify segregation, with Southern states claiming the authority to “interpose” themselves between their citizens and federal desegregation mandates.
While these doctrines were firmly rejected by the Civil War and subsequent Supreme Court rulings, their spirit lives on in the actions of progressive courts and state governments. Consider the Hawaii Supreme Court’s defiance in Wilson, which amounts to a modern form of judicial nullification. Rather than challenging the constitutionality of Bruen, Hawaii has simply decided that the Second Amendment does not apply in its jurisdiction.
This selective obedience to Supreme Court rulings is not just a legal anomaly – it is an existential threat to constitutional governance. If courts and states are allowed to flout precedent whenever it conflicts with their policy goals, the rule of law becomes a casualty of political expediency.
The Role of the Biden Administration and Congress
Chief Justice Roberts’ report also serves as a veiled critique of the Biden administration and key members of Congress. The administration’s attempts to delegitimize the Court have been relentless. President Biden’s past flirtations with court-packing and Vice President Harris’ comments casting doubt on rulings unfavorable to their agenda reflect a strategy to undermine the judiciary. These actions signal to lower courts and state governments that defiance of Supreme Court rulings is not only acceptable but encouraged.
Senators Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Dick Durbin (D-IL) have played no small part in this erosion. Schumer’s infamous threat to Justices Kavanaugh and Gorsuch in 2020 – “You will pay the price!” – is emblematic of a broader campaign to bully the Court into submission. Meanwhile, Durbin’s Judiciary Committee hearings have devolved into partisan theatrics, with efforts to impose judicial ethics reforms often cloaked in disinformation about the Court’s practices. These efforts, while framed as ethical oversight, are designed more to undermine the Court’s legitimacy than to address genuine concerns.
With the incoming administration and the Senate’s balance of power shifting toward the GOP, Democrats will set aside their court-packing schemes – for now. But this is hardly the end of the story. The plans to expand the Court will undoubtedly be dusted off and revived the next time Democrats control both the presidency and the Senate. This cyclical threat to the judiciary underscores the need for a principled defense of its independence that transcends the changing winds of political fortune.
Why Roberts’ Warning Matters
Chief Justice Roberts sounded the alarm. The judiciary’s authority is under siege from politicians, activists, and courts that disregard precedent. This is not a battle conservatives can afford to lose. The Constitution demands fidelity to the rule of law, and the judiciary’s role as its guardian must be protected at all costs.
The Hawaii Supreme Court’s defiance, the Biden-Harris administration’s rhetoric, and Congress’s antics all threaten to erode the judiciary’s legitimacy. But, as Roberts reminds us, the integrity of our Republic depends on adherence to the Constitution. It is time for all who value liberty and constitutional governance to heed his warning.
~
Charlton Allen is an attorney, writer, and former chief executive officer and chief judicial officer of the North Carolina Industrial Commission. He is the founder and editor of The American Salient and the host of the Modern Federalist podcast.